IRLF 


B   V 

4070 

S2366 

1914 

MAIN 


GIFT   OF 


THE  NEW  COVENANT:  Jeremiah  31.31-34: 
INAUGURAL  ADDRESS  delivered  by  the  Rev. 
William  Henry  Oxtoby,  D.  D.,  as  Gray  Pro- 
fessor of  Hebrew  Exegesis  and  Old  Testament 
Literature. 


SAN  FRANCISCO  THEOLOGICAL 
SEMINARY 

SAN  ANSELMO,  CALIFORNIA 
SEPTEMBER  16,  1914 


THE  NEW  COVENANT:  Jeremiah  31.31-34: 
INAUGURAL  ADDRESS  delivered  by  the  Rev. 
William  Henry  Oxtoby,  D.  D.,  as  Gray  Pro- 
fessor of  Hebrew  Exegesis  and  Old  Testament 
Literature. 


SAN  FRANCISCO  THEOLOGICAL 
SEMINARY 

SAN  ANSELMO,  CALIFORNIA 
SEPTEMBER  16,  1914 


Printed  by 

Taylor,  Nash  &  Taylor 
San  Francisco 


PREFATORY  NOTE 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  San  Fran- 
cisco Theological  Seminary  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in 
the  United  States  of  America,  held  April  23,  1913,  the  Rev. 
William  Henry  Oxtoby,  D.  D.,  Pastor  of  the  Tabernacle 
Presbyterian  Church  of  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  was  unanimously 
elected  Gray  Professor  of  Hebrew  Exegesis  and  Old  Testa- 
ment Literature.  This  election  was  approved  by  the  General 
Assembly,  in  session  at  Atlanta,  Georgia,  May  23,  1913; 
and  by  the  Synod  of  California,  in  session  at  Santa  Rosa, 
Oct.  1 6,  1913.  Dr.  Oxtoby  accepted  this  election,  and  entered 
upon  his  duties  at  the  beginning  of  the  session  of  1913-14. 

The  Inaugural  Service  was  held  in  Assembly  Hall,  San 
Anselmo,  California,  Sept.  16,  1914.  President  Warren  Hall 
Landon,  D.  D.,  presided,  and  led  in  the  Invocation.  The  Les- 
son from  the  Scriptures  was  read  by  the  Rev.  John  C. 
Miller,  D.  D.  The  Rev.  Walter  Hays  offered  Prayer.  The 
Formula  of  Subscription  was  read  by  Mr.  George  D.  Gray, 
Vice-President  of  the  Board  of  Trustees,  and  son  of  Mr. 
Nathaniel  Gray,  in  honor  of  whom  the  Chair  was  named. 
The  Charge  to  the  newly  inaugurated  Professor  was  de- 
livered by  the  Rev.  Robert  Freeman,  D.  D.  The  Inaugural 
Address  was  then  delivered,  and  the  service  was  closed 
with  Prayer  and  the  Benediction  by  the  Rev.  Ernest  F. 
Hall,  D.  D. 

The  Inaugural  Address  is  published  by  the  Board  of 
Trustees  of  the  Seminary. 


.'!GJ99i 


Mr.  President,  Members  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  and 
Friends  of  San  Francisco  Theological  Seminary : 

Before  discussing  the  theme  which  I  have  chosen  for  this 
inaugural  occasion,  I  wish  to  express  my  sincere  appreci- 
ation of  the  honor  which  has  been  conferred  upon  me  in 
my  election  to  the  Chair  of  Hebrew  Exegesis  and  Old 
Testament  Literature,  founded  in  memory  of  the  late  Na- 
thaniel Gray.  My  constant  endeavor  shall  be  to  prove 
worthy  of  the  confidence  thus  reposed  in  me,  and  so  to 
teach  that  those  who  here  are  trained  for  the  work  of  the 
gospel  ministry  may  be  the  better  equipped  to  take  part  in 
that  ministry,  and  rightly  to  interpret  to  others,  beginning 
from  Moses  and  from  all  the  prophets,  the  things  concerning 
our  Lord  and  Savior  Jesus  Christ. 

I  have  taken  as  my  theme  on  this  occasion  the  prophecy 
of  Jeremiah  concerning  the  New  Covenant,  recorded  in  the 
3ist  Chapter  of  his  Book,  verses  31  to  34: 

"Behold,  the  days  come,  saith  Jehovah,  that  I  will  make 
a  new  covenant  with  the  house  of  Israel,  and  with  the  house 
of  Judah:  not  according  to  the  covenant  that  I  made 
with  their  fathers  in  the  day  that  I  took  them  by  the  hand 
to  bring  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt ;  which  my  covenant 
they  brake,  although  I  was  a  husband  unto  them,  saith  Je- 
hovah. But  this  is  the  covenant  that  I  will  make  with  the 
house  of  Israel  after  those  days,  saith  Jehovah:  I  will  put 
my  law  in  their  inward  parts,  and  in  their  heart  will  I  write 
it;  and  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be  my  people. 
And  they  shall  teach  no  more  every  man  his  neighbor,  and 
every  man  his  brother,  saying,  Know  Jehovah;  for  they 
shall  all  know  me,  from  the  least  of  them  unto  the  greatest 
of  them,  saith  Jehovah :  for  .1  will  forgive  their  iniquity,  and 
their  sin  will  I  remember  no  more." 

The  Jeremianic  authorship  of  this  passage  has  been  ques- 
tioned by  some.  Movers  attributed  both  Chapters  30  and  31, 
in  their  present  form,  to  the  Second  Isaiah,  a  view  with 
which  in  general  de  Wette  and  Hitzig  later  accorded.  Graf 
upheld,  while  Stade  and  Smend  rejected,  the  authorship  of 
Chapters  30  and  31  by  Jeremiah.  Giesebrecht  rejected  the 
Jeremianic  authorship  of  Chapter  30,  but  attributed  certain 
verses  in  Chapter  31,  including  verses  31-34,  to  Jeremiah. 
Duhm  in  part  agreed  with  Giesebrecht,  but  rejected  verses 
3I-34.1  The  most  forceful  arguments  against  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  passage  have  been  made  by  Duhm;2  and  the 

1  Fov  a  discussion  regarding  the  authenticity  of  the  passage,  see  Cornill,  Das 
Buck  Jeremia,  pp.   323,   348  ff. ;  Peake,  Jeremiah,  ii.   pp.  68  ff.,   101   if. 
2  Das  Buch  Jeremia,  p.  255  ff. 


strongest  arguments  in  favor,  by  Cornill.1  Cornill's  argu- 
ment is  pronounced  by  George  Adam  Smith2  to  be  "un- 
answerable;" and  Peake3  expresses  the  hope  that  Cornill's 
"brilliant  refutation"  of  Duhm's  position  "may  prove  a  final 
vindication  of  the  authenticity."  Cornill  himself,  writing 
since  the  publication  of  his  commentary,  declares,4  "The 
famous  oracle  about  the  New  Covenant  still  appears  to  me 
to  be  incontestable."  McFadyen3  is  non-committal,  but  says, 
"At  any  rate,  it  is  conceived  in  the  spirit  of  the  prophet." 
H.  P.  Smith6  declares  that  the  language  of  Chaps.  30  and  31 
"we  cannot  possibly  suppose  to  have  been  used  by"  Jere- 
miah; and  Schmidt7  gives  as  the  probable  date  of  30-31  "the 
eve  of  Xerxes'  expedition  against  Greece."  Buhl,8  however, 
maintains  that  there  is  no  real  ground  for  denying  the  Jere- 
mianic  authorship  of  verses  31-34.  Marti9  holds  to  the  au- 
thorship by  Jeremiah,  as  do  also  Kautzsch10  and  Kent.11 
Driver12  assumes  the  authorship  by  Jeremiah :  "By  his  con- 
ception of  the  'New  Covenant'  he  surpasses  in  spirituality 
and  profoundity  of  insight  every  other  prophet  of  the  Old 
Testament."  Buttenwieser13  also  takes  the  Jeremianic  au- 
thorship for  granted,  characterizing  this  vision  of  the  proph- 
et as  "the  very  pinnacle  of  prophetic  idealism,  (than  which 
no  visionary  of  whatever  age  could  go  farther.)"  Peake14 
registers  "his  unshaken  conviction  that  though  in  its  present 
form  we  may  owe  it  (verses  31-34)  to  Baruch,  the  prophecy 
itself  comes  from  Jeremiah  and  from  no  other,  and  is  the 
worthy  crown  of  his  teaching."  "Even  so  not  the  substance 
alone,  which  is  the  vital  matter,  but  also  the  form  is  largely 
Jeremianic."15 

A  strong  argument  in  favor  of  the  authenticity  of  the 
passage  is  its  harmony,  both  in  language  and  thought,  with 
recognized  Jeremianic  prophecies.  And  it  is  also  true  that 
the  passage  forms  an  appropriate  climax  to  the  teaching  of 
the  prophet  of  Anathoth. 

As  regards  linguistic  harmony,  the  phrase,  "Behold,  the 
days  come,  and,"  is  characteristic  of  Jeremiah,16  occurring 
elsewhere  in  his  writings  no  less  than  fourteen  times,17 

1  Das  Buck  Jeremia,  pp.  323,  348  ff. 

2  Jerusalem,  ii.  p.   313,  note  3. 

3  Jeremiah,  ii.  p.  102. 

4  Introduction  to  the  Canonical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  304. 
B  An  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  p.  142. 

•  The  Religion  of  Israel,  p.  245  f. 

7  Encyclopaedia  Biblica,  col.  2391. 

8  Realencyklop'ddie,  fur  protestantische  Theologie  und  Kirche,  viii.  p.  655. 

9  Die  Religion  des  alien  Testaments,  p.  60. 
"Hastings,  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  Extra  Vol.  p.  697. 

11  Sermons,  Epistles  and  Apocalypses  of  Israel's  Prophets,  p.  285. 

12  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament,  1913  Ed.,  p.  275;  and  A 
Standard  Bible  Dictionary,  p.  393. 

13  The  Prophets  of  Israel,  pp.  23  f.;  318  f. 

14  ii.  p.  70. 
«  ii.  p.  103. 

"Driver,  Introduction,   1913  Ed.,  p.  276. 

[er.    7.32;    9.25;    16.14;    19.6;    23.5,   7;    30.3;    31.27,    38;    33.14;    48.12;    49.2; 


"Jer 
51.47,  52. 


8 


while  aside  from  these  passages  the  expression  is  found,  in 
the  entire  Old  Testament,  but  six  times.1  "In  the  day  that  I 
took  them  by  the  hand  to  bring  them  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt"  reminds  us  of  four  other  passages.2  "In  their  heart 
will  I  write  it"  recalls  "It  is  graven  upon  the  tablet  of  their 
heart."3  The  expression,  "know  Jehovah,"  Jeremiah  uses  fre- 
quently.4 The  terms  of  the  historic  covenant,  "I  will  be  their 
God,  and  they  shall  be  my  people,"  occur  several  times 
in  Jeremiah's  writings.5  Nor  is  any  of  the  language  em- 
ployed necessarily  later  than  Jeremiah,  or  opposed  to  his 
usage.6 

The  arguments  in  favor  of  the  authenticity  of  the  pas- 
sage drawn  from  its  relation  to  Jeremiah's  other  teachings, 
can  be  better  presented  later  on.  Suffice  it  here  to  say  that 
Jeremiah,  influenced  strongly  as  he  was,  both  in  style  and 
ideas,  by  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,7  is  the  very  prophet 
who  would  have  been  likely  to  refer  to  a  New  Covenant. 
The  idea  of  such  a  covenant  is  not  only  not  incongruous 
with  the  rest  of  his  teaching,  but  is  in  truth  the  fitting  cli- 
max of  his  book.  Appropriate  it  is  that  he  who  foresaw  the 
time  when  the  ark  of  the  covenant  would  be  no  longer  re- 
membered or  missed,8  he  who  thinks  of  circumcision  as  a 
rite  of  the  heart,0  he  who  laid  supreme  stress  for  the  first 
time  upon  the  individualistic  note  in  religion,10  should  here 
strike  the  highest  spiritual  note  of  any  teacher  before  the 
Divine  One  of  Nazareth. 

Confident,  then,  that  "so  far  nothing  has  been  urged 
against  its  authenticity  that  need  shake  our  confidence  in 
it,"11  let  us  glance  at  the  date  of  composition,  and  then  ex- 
amine the  teaching  of  the  passage. 

The  time  of  composition  would  seem  to  be  soon  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  in  586  B.  C.  This  is  CorniU's  con- 
clusion, and  also  Buhl's,12  and  gains  probability  from  the 
fact  that  Chaps.  30  and  31  appear  to  be  post-exilic.  Batten,13 
however,  dates  the  prophecy  a  year  earlier,  while  the  prophet 
was  a  prisoner  in  the  court  of  the  guard.  Driver  gives  a 
similar  date,14  although  he  adds,  "It  is  more  than  possible 
that  the  contents  had  in  part  been  originally  uttered  pre- 

1  Amos  4.2;  8.11;  9.13;  1  Sam.  2.31;  2  Kgs.  20.17;  Isa.  39.6. 

2  Jer.  7.22;  11.4;  11.7;  34.13.  Cf.  also  7.25. 
3Jer.  17.1. 

4  Jer.  2.8;  4.22;  9.3,  6,  24;  22.16;  24.7. 

5  Jer.  11.4;  24.7;  30.22;  31.1;  32.38.  S^+^ 
8  See  W.  J.  Moulton,  in  The  Expositor,  April,  1906,  p.  381  f. 

'2  Kgs.   23.2,  21;  cf.  Deut.  29.1. 

8  Jer.  3.16. 

»  Jer.  4.4. 
10  Jer.  31.30. 
"Peake,  ii.  p.   103. 
12  Realencyklopadie,  p.  655. 

18  The  Hebrew  Prophet,  p.  158,  making  Chaps.  30-33  a  unit,  and  giving  to  30- 
31  the  date  of  32-33. 

14  Introduction,  p.  262. 


viously,  but not  committed  to  writing  till  subsequent- 
ly, probably  after  the  fall  of  the  city." 

Coming  now  to  an  examination  of  the  prophecy  itself, 
we  find  the  prophet  looking  towards  the  future:  "Behold, 
the  days  come,  saith  Jehovah."  Jeremiah,  as  all  the  prophets, 
was  a  preacher  to  his  own  day,  but  forceful  in  that  message 
to  his  own  generation,  because  he  caught  a  vision  of  coming 
glory.  God's  spokesman  was  he,  but  a  true  representative, 
because  he  penetrated  behind  and  beyond  the  present  to  the 
days  to  come. 

"That  I  will  make  a  new  covenant  with  the  house  of 
Israel,  and  with  the  house  of  Judah."  The  word  for  "cove- 
nant" is  found  almost  three  hundred  times  in  the  Hebrew 
Old  Testament,  but  its  place  in  the  religion  of  Israel  is  even 
more  important  than  such  an  arithmetical  standard  would 
indicate.  It  is  the  central  idea  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  al- 
though the  word  itself  occurs  infrequently  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, the  idea,  in  the  more  spiritual  form  of  fellowship  with 
God,  is  equally  central  there. 

The  Hebrew  word  for  covenant,  Berith,  is  now  known  to 
be  derived  from  an  Assyrian  root  meaning  "bind."  A  cove- 
nant, then,  is  literally  a  bond, — at  times  imposed  by  one 
party  upon  another;  or,  more  usually,  in  covenants  among 
men,  a  contract  wherein  each  party  assumes  certain  obliga- 
tions, as  in  the  compact  between  Ahab  and  Ben-hadad:1 
Ben-hadad  said  unto  Ahab,  "The  cities  which  my  father  took 
from  thy  father  I  will  restore;  and  thou  shalt  make  streets 
for  thee  in  Damascus,  as  my  father  made  in  Samaria.  And  I, 
(said  Ahab,)  will  let  thee  go  with  this  covenant.  So  he  made 
a  covenant  with  him,  and  let  him  go."  A  covenant,  however, 
even  when  between  men,  is  not  merely  equivalent  to  what 
we  would  understand  by  a  contract;  it  always  contains  a 
religious  element :  God  is  invoked,  or  a  religious  sacrifice  is 
offered.  The  records  relating  to  covenants  often  make  men- 
tion of  a  solemn  oath,  each  party  invoking  upon  himself  a 
curse,  in  case  he  violates  his  part  of  the  contract. 

The  Hebrew  phrase  for  making  a  covenant  is  literally 
"cutting  a  covenant,"  an  expression  evidently  derived  from 
such  a  ceremony  as  is  described  in  the  covenant  made  with 
Abram,2  where  the  patriarch  divided  the  sacrifice  into  two 
parts,  laying  one  half  over  against  the  other  half,  with  a 
space  between,  and  in  the  darkness  of  the  night,  as  deep 
sleep  fell  upon  him,  a  smoking  furnace  and  a  flaming  torch 
passed  between  the  pieces.  The  ceremony,  which  was  ob- 
served also  by  Assyrians  and  others,  in  antiquity,  prevailed 


1  1   Kgs.  20.34. 

2  Gen.  15. 


10 


among  the  Hebrews  at  least  until  Jeremiah's  day,  for  we 
read,1  "I  will  give  the  men  that  have  transgressed  my  cove- 
nant, that  have  not  performed  the  words  of  the  covenant 
which  they  made  before  me,  when  they  cut  the  calf  in  twain 
and  passed  between  the  parts  thereof;  the  princes  of  Judah, 
and  the  princes  of  Jerusalem,  the  eunuchs,  and  the  priests, 
and  all  the  people  of  the  land,  that  passed  between  the  parts 
of  the  calf ;  I  will  even  give  them  into  the  hand  of  their  ene- 
mies." The  phrase,  "cutting  a  covenant,"  evidently  originat- 
ed from  this  rite  of  cutting  in  pieces  the  sacrificial  victim.2 
The  significance  of  passing  between  the  parts  of  the  slaugh- 
tered animal  seems  to  have  been  either  that  each  party  in- 
voked upon  himself,  in  case  he  violated  the  covenant,  a 
similar  fate  ;8  or,  that  both  parties  passed  between  the  pieces, 
as  a  symbol  that  they  were  united  by  being  taken  within  the 
mystical  life  of  the  same  victim.4 

Following  the  analogy  of  covenants  among  men,  the 
covenants  of  God  with  men  are  of  the  nature  of  a  bond ;  but 
the  divine  covenants  are  unilateral,  God  taking  the  initiative, 
making  certain  promises  to  men,  conditioned  upon  the  ful- 
filment on  their  part  of  certain  obligations.  The  divine  cove- 
nants imply  two  parties,  God  and  men,  but  the  two  are 
naturally  not  on  an  equality.  The  covenant  is  more  a  divine 
ordinance  or  promise,  with  pledges  or  signs,  an  expression 
of  His  love  or  gracious  attitude.  Thus  we  have  the  covenant 
made  with  Noah,5  a  promise  by  God  that  the  deluge  would 
never  be  repeated;  the  covenant  with  Abram,6  promising 
him  a  numerous  posterity,  and  possession  of  the  land  of 
Canaan;  the  covenant  with  Phinehas,7  promising  to  him 
and  his  descendants  an  everlasting  priesthood ;  the  covenant 
with  David,8  promising  him  and  his  descendants  an  everlast- 
ing kingdom.  These  are  four  great  covenants  of  the  Old 
Testament. 

Deuteronomy  makes  mention  of  three  covenants.  With 
the  fathers,  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob,  was  a  covenant 
made,9  the  promise  connected  with  it  being  that  Jehovah 
would  multiply  their  descendants,10  and  assure  them  posses- 
sion of  the  land  of  Canaan.11  At  Horeb  was  a  second  cove- 

1  Jer.  34.18. 

2  For  a  derivation  from  a  custom  of  covenanters  cutting  into  each  other's  arm 
and  sucking  the  blood,  see  Kohler,  in  The  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  iv.  p.  318. 

3  So,  Driver,  The  Book  of  Genesis,  p.  176;  and  The  Book  of  the  Prophet  Jere- 
miah, p.  213,  note;  Davidson,  Hastings,  D.  B.,  i.  p.  510;  Kautzsch,  Hastings,  D.B., 
Extra  Vol.  p.  630;  Schmidt,  Encyclopaedia  Biblica,  col.  931;  following  Livy  1.24. 

4  So,   Peake,  Jeremiah   H.    p.    143;    Skinner,   Genesis,   p.    283;   following  W.   R. 
Smith,  The  Religion  of  the  Semites,2  p.  480  f. 

5  Gen.   9.9  ff. 

6  Gen.  15.18;   17.2  ff. 

7  Num.  25.12  f. 

8  Ps.   89.3   f.,  28  f.,   34   ff.;    132.12;   Jer.    33.21. 

9Deut.  4.31;  7.12;  8.18;   1.35;  6.18,  23;   7.8;  8.1;   1.8;  6.10. 
"Deut.  13.17. 
"Deut.  6.18. 

II 


nant  made,  based  on  the  Decalogue,1 — so  absolutely  identi- 
fied with  the  Ten  Words,  that  the  tables  of  stone  and  tables 
of  the  covenant  become  interchangeable  terms, — that  the 
ark  in  which  this  covenant  reposes  becomes  known  as  the 
ark  of  the  covenant.2  In  the  plains  of  Moab  was  a  third  cove- 
nant made,  which  although  essentially  a  renewal  of  that 
made  at  Horeb,  is  expressly  distinguished  from  it.3  Its  con- 
tents are  found  in  Deuteronomy,  which  passed  by  the  name 
of  the  Book  of  the  Covenant.4  The  terms  of  this  third  Deu- 
teronomic  covenant  are  expressed  in  26.17  *•»  "Thou  hast 
avouched  Jehovah  this  day  to  be  thy  God,  and  that  thou 
wouldest  walk  in  his  ways,  and  keep  his  statutes,  and  his 
commandments,  and  his  ordinances,  and  hearken  unto  his 
voice:  and  Jehovah  hath  avouched  thee  this  day  to  be  a 
people  for  his  own  possession,  as  he  hath  promised  thee, 
and  that  thou  shouldest  keep  all  his  commandments ;  and  to 
make  thee  high  above  all  nations  that  he  hath  made,  in 
praise,  and  in  name,  and  in  honor ;  and  that  thou  mayest  be 
a  holy  people  unto  Jehovah  thy  God,  as  he  hath  spoken." 
These  are  the  fundamental  terms  of  the  covenant  of  Israel's 
history:  God,  free  to  choose  any  nation,  chose  Israel  to  be 
the  people  through  whom  He  should  peculiarly  reveal  Him- 
self to  the  world ;  but  the  promises  to  Israel  were  contingent 
upon  their  obedience  to  God's  will.  Israel,  in  turn,  volun- 
tarily assumed  its  part  of  the  covenant,  pledging  obedience 
to  God,  and  subjection  to  His  will. 

The  Old  Covenant  referred  to  by  Jeremiah,  which  is  to  be 
supplanted  by  a  new,  is  that  made  by  Jehovah  with  Israel 
at  Horeb,  and  renewed  on  the  plains  of  Moab,  in  which  He 
becomes  peculiarly  their  God,  and  they  become  peculiarly 
His  people ;  and  Jeremiah,  in  thinking  of  the  Old  Covenant, 
does  not  distinguish  between  the  two.  This  seems  clear,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  Cornill,  and,  following  him,  Peake  and 
Moulton  interpret  the  Old  Covenant  as  referring  exclusively 
to  that  made  at  Sinai, — the  Decalogue.  The  Ten  Command- 
ments constitute  unquestionably  the  foundation  of  this  Old 
Covenant;  but  to  find  in  them  its  entire  content  seems 
scarcely  to  be  warranted  by  a  study  of  Jeremiah's  depend- 
ence upon  the  entire  Book  of  Deuteronomy. 

The  Old  Covenant  of  31.32  was  made  with  the  fathers, 
"in  the  day  that  I  took  them  by  the  hand  to  bring  them  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt."  What  is  the  "day"  referred  to?  Four 
other  passages  in  Jeremiah's  Book  throw  light  upon  both 
the  "day,"  and  the  Old  Covenant. 

1Deut.  4.13;  5.2  ff. ;  9.9  ff. 
21  Kgs.  8.21;  Jer.  3.16. 
3Deut.  29.1. 
4  2  Kgs.  23.2,  21. 

12 


Jer.  34.13  reads:  "I  made  a  covenant  with  your  fathers 
in  the  day  that  I  brought  them  forth  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  out  of  the  house  of  bondage,  saying,  At  the  end  of 
seven  years  ye  shall  let  go  every  man  his  brother  that  is  a 
Hebrew,  that  hath  been  sold  unto  thee,  and  hath  served  thee 
six  years,  thou  shalt  let  him  go  free  from  thee."  The  law 
is  found  both  in  Ex.  21.2  and  Deut.  15.12;  but  Jeremiah's 
quotation  is  from  Deuteronomy,  as  the  expression,  "thou 
shalt  let  him  go  free  from  thee,"  clearly  indicates.  So  that 
here,  by  "the  day  that  I  brought  thee  forth  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt,"  Jeremiah  must  mean  the  general  period  of  the 
Exodus,  and  the  covenant  referred  to  can  be  only  the  third 
Deuteronomic  covenant.  The  reference  can  not  be  to  the 
Decalogue. 

A  second  passage  containing  a  reference  to  "the  day  that 
I  brought  them  forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt"  is  Jer.  11.2 

ff. :  "Hear  ye  the  words  of  this  covenant Thus  saith 

Jehovah  the  God  of  Israel :  Cursed  be  the  man  that  heareth 
not  the  words  of  this  covenant,  which  I  commanded  your 
fathers  in  the  day  that  I  brought  them  forth  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt,  out  of  the  iron  furnace,  saying,  Obey  my  voice, 
and  do  them,  according  to  all  which  I  command  you:  so 
shall  ye  be  my  people,  and  I  will  be  your  God ;  that  I  may 
establish  the  oath  which  I  sware  unto  your  fathers,  to  give 
them  a  land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey,  as  at  this  day."1 
Here,  all  the  references  seem  indubitably  to  be  to  the  Book 
of  Deuteronomy,  and  not  at  all  confined  to  the  Decalogue 
covenant.  "Out  of  the  iron  furnace",  as  a  characterization  of 
Egypt*  is  found  elsewhere  only  in  Deut.  4.20  and  i  Kgs. 
8.51.  "Obey  my  voice  and  do  them,  according  to  all  which  I 
command  you"  recalls  Deut.  27.9  f.,  "This  day  thou  art  be- 
come the  people  of  Jehovah  thy  God.  Thou  shalt  therefore 
obey  the  voice  of  Jehovah  thy  God,  and  do  his  command- 
ments and  his  statutes,  which  I  command  thee  this  day." 
The  curse  pronounced  recalls  Deut.  28.15,  45  or  Deut.  11.28. 
The  terms  of  the  covenant,  "So  shall  ye  be  my  people  and  I 
will  be  your  God,"  are  expressed  in  Deut.  26.17  f.  The  refer- 
ence to  the  establishment  of  the  oath  sworn  unto  the  fathers, 
in  conjunction  with  the  land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey, 
is  found  in  Ex.  13.5,  but  also  in  Deut.  11.9  and  26.15.  The 
reference  to  the  oath  is  frequent  in  Deuteronomy.2  In  this 
passage,  also,  "the  day  that  I  brought  them  forth  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt"  would  seem  to  refer  to  the  period  of  the 
Exodus  in  general ;  and  the  covenant  mentioned  can  scarce- 
ly be  exclusively  the  Decalogue. 

1  It  is  true  that  the  authenticity  of  this  passage  has  been  contested;  but  see 
Peake's  reply,  i.  p.  12  f. 

2Deut.  6.10,   18,  23;   7.13;   8.1;   10.11;    11.21;    19.8;   26.3;   28.11. 

13 


A  third  reference  to  "the  day  that  I  brought  them  up  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt"  is  found  in  Jer.  11.7:  "I  earnestly  pro- 
tested unto  your  fathers  in  the  day  that  I  brought  them  up 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  even  unto  this  day,  saying,  Obey 
my  voice.  Yet  they  obeyed  not,  nor  inclined  their  ear,  but 
walked  every  one  in  the  stubbornness  of  their  evil  heart; 
therefore  I  brought  upon  them  all  the  words  of  this  cove- 
nant, which  I  commanded  them  to  do,  but  they  did  them 
not."  The  reference  is  clearly  to  the  covenant  just  cited, 
Deut.  27.9  f.  And  while  the  reference  to  the  "words  of  this 
covenant",  "brought  upon  them,"  might  be  found  in  Lev. 
26.14  ff.,  a  more  exact  reference  to  the  horrors  of  captivity 
at  the  hand  of  a  foreign  nation  is  found  in  Deut.  28,  verses 
36  ff.,  49  ff.,  64  ff.  So  that  here,  again,  the  "day  that  I 
brought  them  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt"  refers  quite  evi- 
dently to  the  general  period  of  the  Exodus,  and  there  is  no 
evidence  whatever  of  the  covenant  referring  only  to  the 
Decalogue. 

A  fourth  passage  from  Jeremiah's  own  Book  that  throws 
light  upon  the  meaning  of  "the  day"  is  Jer.  7.22  f  f . :  "For  I 
spake  not  unto  your  fathers,  nor  commanded  them  in  the 
day  that  I  brought  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  concern- 
ing burnt-offerings  or  sacrifices :  but  this  thing  I  command- 
ed them,  saying,  Hearken  unto  my  voice,  and  I  will  be  your 
God,  and  ye  shall  be  my  people ;  and  walk  ye  in  all  the  way 
that  I  command  you,  that  it  may  be  well  with  you.  But  they 
hearkened  not,  nor  inclined  their  ear,  but  walked  in  (their 
own)  counsels  (and)  in  the  stubbornness  of  their  evil  heart, 
and  went  backward,  and  not  forward."  The  meaning  of 
which,  if  interpreted  not  only  in  the  light  of  other  propheti- 
cal parallels,  but  in  the  light  of  Jeremiah's  own  words  re- 
corded elsewhere,  is  that  all  sacrifices  have  worth  in  God's 
sight  only  if  they  are  the  expression  of  a  truly  devout  spirit ; 
sacrifices  were  commanded,  but  it  was  never  intended  that 
worship  should  be  something  merely  external;  with  the  of- 
fering must  go  inner  piety,  obedience  of  the  heart  and  life, 
or  it  can  find  no  acceptance  with  God.  This  is  not  only  the 
plain  teaching  of  other  prophets  prior  to  Jeremiah,1  but  we 
have  Jeremiah's  own  commentary,2  "To  what  purpose  com- 
eth  there  to  me  frankincense  from  Sheba,  and  the  sweet 
cane  from  a  far  country?  your  burnt-offerings  are  not  ac- 
ceptable, nor  your  sacrifices  pleasing  unto  me," — which 
clearly  means  that  "an  elaborate  ritual  and  costly  sacrifices"3 
gave  God  no  pleasure  "if  they  were  dissociated  from  obedi- 

1Hos.  6.6;  Am.  5.22  ff.;  Isa.  1.11  ff.;  Micah  6.6  ff. 
2  Jer.  6.20. 
3Peake,  i.  p.   143. 

14 


ence  to  His  commands."1  So,  elsewhere,  Jeremiah  insists 
that  God  asks  for  justice2  and  obedience  to  the  moral  de- 
mands of  the  Decalogue  rather  than  complacent  public  wor- 
ship,3 rather  than  fasting  and  offerings.4  Surely,  Jeremiah 
meant  what  Isaiah  before  him  had  meant,  when  speaking  in 
the  name  of  God,  he  exclaims,5  "I  delight  not  in  the  blood 

of  bullocks,  or  of  lambs when  ye  spread  forth  your 

hands,  I  will  hide  mine  eyes  from  you;  yea,  when  ye  make 
many  prayers,  I  will  not  hear :  your  hands  are  full  of  blood." 
If  it  is  maintained  that  Isaiah  meant  that  sacrifices  in 
themselves  are  unacceptable  to  God,  then  it  must  also  be 
maintained  that  he  meant  that  prayers  in  themselves  are 
also  unacceptable  to  God.  Isaiah  did  not  reject  sacrifice,  any 
more  than  he  rejected  prayer;  he  meant  that  both  must  be 
accompanied  by  a  devout  spirit  and  a  clean  life.6 

Prof.  Moulton  says  of  7.22  ff.,  "Here  it  seems  most  likely 
that  he  is  distinguishing  between  the  code  of  Deuteronomy, 
with  its  insistence  on  the  central  sanctuary  and  on  sacrificial 
dues,  and  some  earlier  and  simpler  law  of  obedience."7  But, 
what  proof  is  there  of  the  existence  of  "some  earlier  and 
simpler  law  of  obedience"?  Instead  of  opposing  the  teaching 
of  Deuteronomy,  is  Jeremiah  not  rather  here  stating  its 
underlying  principle,  using  distinctively  Deuteronomic 
phraseology8  in  which  to  express  that  principle:  "hearken 
unto  my  (God's)  voice,"9  "to  walk  in  the  ways"  of  Jehovah,10 
"that  it  may  be  well  with  you,"11  (a  phrase  used  by  no  other 
prophet,  and  in  the  rest  of  the  Pentateuch  found  only  in 
Gen.  12.13  and  40.14).  More  than  any  other  prophet,  Jere- 
miah reveals  the  influence  of  Deuteronomy  ;12  and  his  use  of 
the  fundamental  principles  of  Deuteronomy  is  in  harmony 
with  Christ's  use  of  the  same  book,  in  repelling  the  Tempter,18 
and  in  taking  from  it  His  summary  of  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets,14  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy 
heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  might."15 

While  the  passage,  7.23,  is  not  found  in  exact  verbal 

*Cf.  also  1   Sam.   15.22. 
2  Jer.  7.5. 
8  Jer.  7.9  f. 
«Jer.  14.12. 
8Isa.  1.11-15. 

6  "What   the   prophet   repudiates    is   not  cultus   as   such,   but   the   unholy   com- 
bination of  ritual  worship  with  immoral  conduct."   (Skinner,  Isaiah,  i.  p.  6.) 

7  The  Expositor,  April,  1906,  p.  374. 

8  Driver,  Deuteronomy,  p.  Ixxix.  ff. 

9Deut.  4.30;  8.20;  9.23;  13.4,  18;  15.5;  26.14,  17;  27.10;  28.1,  2,  15,  45,  62; 
30.2,  8,  10,  20. 

10  Deut.  8.6;   10.12;   11.22;   19.9;  26.17;  28.9;  30.16. 

"Deut.  4.40;   5.16,  29,  33;  6.3;  6.18;    12.25,  28;    19.13;  22.7. 

12  Driver,  Deuteronomy,  p.  xcii.  f.  "Zunz  has  transcribed  in  parallel  columns 
66  passages  of  Deut.,  of  which  there  are  echoes  in  not  less  than  86  of  Jer.;  and  he 
certainly  has  not  exhausted  all  that  could  be  found." 

"Matt.  4.3  f.;  Luke  4.3  f.    Cf.  Deut.  8.3;  6.16;  6.13. 

14  Matt.  22.37;  Deut.  6.5. 

16  Cf.  also  Matt.   18.16  with  Deut.   19.15;  and  Matt.  5.48  with  Deut.   18.13. 

15 


form  in  the  Pentateuch,  the  employment  of  Deuteronomic 
phrases,  and  the  quotation  of  the  terms  of  the  third  Deu- 
teronomic covenant,  "I  will  be  your  God  and  ye  shall  be  my 
people,"  would  indicate  again  that  Jeremiah's  reference  is  to 
the  general  period  of  the  Exodus,  and  that  he  is  not  thinking 
exclusively  of  the  Decalogue. 

The  fact  seems  to  be,  as  before  said,  that  Jeremiah  does 
not  distinguish  between  the  covenant  made  at  Horeb  and 
its  renewal  in  the  plains  of  Moab.  "The  day  that  I  took  them 
by  the  hand  to  bring  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt"  is  no 
particular  day  of  twenty-four  hours,  but  the  entire  genera- 
tion spent  in  the  passage  from  Egypt  to  the  promised  land. 
In  that  general  period,  God  made  the  Old  Covenant  with 
His  people,  its  terms  being  that  He  would  be  their  God,  and 
they  His  people, — the  content  of  the  covenant  being  found 
in  both  the  Decalogue  and  Deuteronomy,  the  "Book  of  the 
Covenant." 

It  is  true,  as  Cornill  has  argued,1  that  Jeremiah  lays 
stress  upon  the  Decalogue,2  and  that  the  expression,  "In 
their  heart  will  I  write  my  law,"  gains  new  meaning,  as  we 
contrast  it  with  the  Ten  Commandments  written  by  the 
finger  of  God  on  the  tables  of  stone  ;3  but  the  contrast  does 
not  necessarily  imply  that  the  Old  Covenant  and  the  Deca- 
logue are  interchangeable  terms,  although  unquestionably 
the  Covenant  includes  and  rests  upon  the  Commandments. 
The  Old  Covenant,  in  the  thought  of  Jeremiah,  in  each 
passage,  seems  to  be  that  made  at  Horeb,  and  renewed  in 
the  Moabite  plains. 

If,  now,  by  the  Old  Covenant,  Jeremiah  means  the  Deca- 
logue and  the  Deuteronomic  legislation  as  well,  does  the 
objection  hold  good,  that  Jeremiah  should  have  spoken  of 
a  new  law,  rather  than  of  a  New  Covenant?  Can  God  in  the 
days  to  come  write  on  the  heart  these  old  laws?  Certainly, 
as  far  as  the  Decalogue  is  concerned,  He  may  and  will. 
Cornill's  reply4  at  this  point  is  final:  in  the  Decalogue  are 
laid  once  for  all  the  foundations  of  religion  and  morality; 
Jesus  did  not  abrogate  the  Ten  Commandments,  but  rather 
filled  them  more  full  of  meaning.  Adultery  He  traced  to  the 
thought  of  lust,  and  murder  to  anger  and  hate,  but  He  did 
not  repeal  or  amend  any  one  of  the  Ten.  Sinai  is  a  Christian 
as  well  as  a  Hebrew  Mount.  The  moral  law  within  will  ever 
stir  to  awe.  As  for  the  Deuteronomic  legislation,  will  it  not, 
in  its  innermost  meaning,  also  abide?  If  God's  requirements 
are  obedience,  hearkening  to  His  word,  walking  in  the  ways 

1  Jeremia,  p.  349. 

2  Jer.  7.9. 

3Deut.  4.13;  Ex.  31.18. 
*  Jeremia,  p.  350. 

16 


which  He  commands,  if  sacrifices  are  worthless  unless  as  the 
expression  of  inner  piety,  will  not  all  this  continue  in  the 
days  to  come,  even  as  in  the  days  that  are  past?  The  ques- 
tion does  not  concern  "food  laws"  and  "holiness-regula- 
tions," but,  by  Jeremiah's  own  interpretation,  the  spiritual 
requirements  of  the  old  legislation.  "Still  stands  Thine 
ancient  Sacrifice,  An  humble  and  a  contrite  heart." 

The  New  Covenant  will  not  differ  from  the  Old  in  that  it 
will  have  for  its  content  a  new  law;  the  Decalogue  and  the 
real  requirements  of  the  Deuteronomic  legislation  will  con- 
tinue still  in  force;  nor  will  it  differ  from  the  Old  in  its 
terms;  these  will  continue  the  same,  "I  will  be  their  God, 
and  they  shall  be  my  people."  But,  the  New  will  be  able  to 
accomplish  that  wherein  the  Old  failed,  because  it  possesses 
a  new  efficient  power. 

"I  will  make  a  new  covenant."  A  New  one  is  necessary, 
because  the  Old  one  has  been  abrogated.  Of  old,  Jehovah 
chose  Israel  to  be  His  people,  and  Israel  took  Him  to  be 
their  God.  But,  Israel  broke  its  part  of  the  contract.  Instead 
of  loyally  serving  Jehovah,  altars  to  strange  gods  had  been 
erected;  the  worship  that  should  have  been  offered  to  Him 
alone  had  been  offered  repeatedly  to  others;  therefore  the 
Old  Covenant  had  become  null  and  void. 

"Which  my  covenant  they  brake,  although  I  was  a  hus- 
band unto  them."1  In  spite  of  God's  love  for  them,  they  had 
broken  His  covenant,  and  had  been  rejected.  Samaria  and 
the  Northern  Kingdom  had  fallen  before  the  Assyrians  in 
722  B.  C. ;  now,  in  586,  Jerusalem  and  the  Southern  King- 
dom had  fallen  before  the  Babylonians.  In  the  story  of  his 
nation,  Jeremiah  reads  how  God  deals  with  men.  The  break- 
ing of  the  covenant  and  the  national  disaster  were  no  hap- 
hazard coincidence ;  the  deportation  is  explained  by  the 
apostasy.  In  giving  us  this  philosophy  of  history,  the  prophet 
makes  a  contribution  of  peculiar  worth.  For,  only  in  a  his- 
tory which  runs  through  centuries  can  God's  ways  be  traced. 
Not  in  a  generation,  however  replete  with  interest,  but  only 
in  a  millennium,  is  it  possible  to  find  the  final  explanation  of 
things.  The  Hebrews,  through  their  prophets,  gave  to  the 
world  its  first  divine  philosophy  of  history,  and  in  so  doing 
added  to  the  Old  Testament  a  unique  value.2 

But,  proclaims  the  prophet,  Jehovah's  love  for  His  peo- 

1  When  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (8.8  ff.)   quotes  this  passage, 
he  writes,  "And  I  regarded  them  not,"  instead  of  "Although  I  was  a  husband  unto 
them,"  following  the  LXX.,  which  perhaps  translated  "ga'alti"  instead  of  "ba'alti;" 
the    Syriac    has    also    this    sense.    (So,    Giesebrecht,    and    others,    following    Capell; 
see    Moulton,    p.    380.)     The    Massoretic    reading,    however,    is    in    harmony    with 
Jer.    3.14. 

2  The  Books  of  Joshua,  Judges,   Samuel  and  Kings  were  included  by  the  He- 
brews  under   the   category   of   "Former    Prophets;"    historians   were   prophets,    and 
prophets  were  historians,  interpreting  the  Divine  purpose  in  the  story  of  the  past. 

17 


pie  still  continues.  The  former  relationship  will  some  day 
be  re-established,  a  new  bond  will  be  formed.  "I  will  make 
a  new  covenant  with  the  house  of  Israel,  and  with  the  house 
of  Judah," — not  with  the  Southern  Kingdom  alone,  but  with 
the  Northern  as  well.  The  prophet's  vision  sees  the  nation 
united  as  in  days  of  yore,  no  North,  no  South,  one  reunited 
people,  bound  by  a  common  New  Covenant  to  a  common 
God. 

This  New  Covenant  is  defined,  first  negatively,  then  pos- 
itively. 

Negatively,  "Not  according  to  the  covenant  that  I  made 
with  their  fathers  in  the  day  that  I  took  them  by  the  hand 
to  bring  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt," — tender  and  lov- 
ing words, — a  picture  of  a  parent  taking  the  child  by  the 
hand,  guiding  it,  upholding  it,  lest  it  stumble  or  fall.  It  is 
Murillo's  beautiful  conception  of  the  Guardian  Angel,  that 
wins  more  loving  admiration  from  visitors  than  does  the 
more  wonderful  St.  Anthony  and  the  Christ-Child  jthat 
hangs  so  near  it  in  the  Seville  Cathedral.  Where  in  Scripture 
is  a  more  tender  delineation  of  a  Father's  love — unless  it  be 
Hosea's  thought  of  God1  as  the  parent  teaching  the  infant 
child  to  walk — with  outstretched  arms  encouraging  the  tod- 
dling one  to  take  the  first  steps?  Let  it  never  be  said  that  the 
God  of  the  Old  Testament  is  a  cruel  deity.  A  guardian 
angel,  a  parent  teaching  the  first  step, — let  such  pictures  be 
hung  in  the  gallery  side  by  side  with  those  which  St.  John 
has  portrayed. 

Positively,  "But  this  is  the  covenant  that  I  will  make 
with  the  house  of  Israel  after  those  days,  saith  Jehovah: 
I  will  put  my  law  in  their  inward  parts,  and  in  their  heart 
will  I  write  it ;  and  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be  my 
people.  And  they  shall  teach  no  more  every  man  his  neigh- 
bor, and  every  man  his  brother,  saying,  Know  Jehovah ;  for 
they  shall  all  know  me,  from  the  least  of  them  unto  the 
greatest  of  them,  saith  Jehovah:  for  I  will  forgive  their  in- 
iquity, and  their  sin  will  I  remember  no  more." 

Three  characteristics  will  the  New  Covenant  possess,  as 
distinguished  from  the  Old:  inwardness,  universal  knowl- 
edge of  God,  forgiveness  of  sin. 

First,  inwardness:  "I  will  put  my  law  in  their  inward 
parts,  and  in  their  heart  will  I  write  it."  No  longer  will  the 
law  be  inscribed  on  tables  of  stone,  but  on  the  tables  of  the 
heart.  The  New  Covenant  does  not  mean  so  much  the  giving 
of  a  new  law  as  the  imparting  of  a  new  inner  motive  force 
that  will  make  possible  obedience  to  the  spirit,  the  per- 
manent, eternal  element  of  the  old  law.  The  weakness  of  any 

1Hos.  11.3. 

18 


law  written  on  stone  or  clay  tablets  is  that  it  is  fixed,  un- 
alterable; the  law  written  on  the  individual  heart  will  be 
elastic,  adaptable  to  changing  times  and  circumstances.  The 
tables  of  stone  might  be  "in  the  ark,.... and  yet...per- 
sistedly  neglected,  ignored ; ....  a  law  in  the  heart  is  a  law 
remembered,  comprehended,  inwardly  treasured."1  It  will  be 
not  so  much  an  external  code  as  a  principle,  applicable  to 
individuals  of  varying  climes  and  times.  Each  individual 
will  have  an  alert,  awakened  conscience  to  act  as  each  sep- 
arate occasion  demands.  The  New  Covenant  will  be  the 
spiritual  reality  to  which  the  Old  looked  forward.  Even  as 
sin  is  graven  on  the  tablet  of  the  heart,2  so  will  the  heart 
be  filled  with  a  new  motive  power  for  good. 

Jeremiah  does  not  amplify  his  statement  regarding  the 
inwardness  of  true  religion.  This  very  circumstance  is  a 
strong  argument  for  the  authenticity  of  the  passage;  for  if 
the  prophet  has  elsewhere  explained  his  thought,  then  is  it 
unnecessary  for  him  here  to  expand.  And  clearly  has  he 
elsewhere  shown  how  the  heart  will  be  enabled  to  receive 
this  inward  law.  To  him,  as  to  St.  Paul,  "circumcision  is  of 
the  heart,  in  the  spirit  and  not  in  the  letter"  :3  "Circumcise 
yourselves  to  Jehovah,  and  take  away  the  foreskins  of  your 
heart  ;"4  "all  the  house  of  Israel  are  uncircumcised  in  heart."8 
On  the  heart  cleansed,  dedicated  to  Jehovah,  will  the  law 
be  written,  in  the  days  to  come.  Again  had  Jeremiah  pro- 
claimed Jehovah's  determination,6  "I  will  give  them  a  heart 
to  know  me,  that  I  am  Jehovah ;  and  they  shall  be  my  people, 
and  I  will  be  their  God ;  for  they  shall  return  unto  me  with 
their  whole  heart."  The  old  heart  had  been  "evil,"  "stub- 
born," disobedient;7  the  new  heart  will  be  transformed, 
made  fit  to  receive  the  divine  law.  It  will  be  obedient  to 
God,  submissive  to  His  will.  "The  'new  birth/  the  'new 
heart/  as  the  Gospel  proclaims  them,  are  really  implied  in 
this  great  saying."8 

Secondly,  the  New  Covenant  will  differ  from  the  Old, 
in  that  it  will  be  characterized  by  universal  knowledge  of 
God:  "And  they  shall  teach  no  more  every  man  his  neigh- 
bor, and  every  man  his  brother,  saying,  Know  Jehovah ;  for 
they  shall  all  know  me,  from  the  least  of  them  unto  the 
greatest  of  them,  saith  Jehovah."  In  the  old  day,  knowledge 
of  God  was  confined  to  a  few;  in  the  coming  era,  it  will  be 
the  possession  of  all.  Jeremiah  is  a  nationalist,  still ;  the  New 

1  Adeney,  in  Men  of  the  Old  Testament,  Solomon  to  Jonah,  p.  215. 
2Jer.  17.1. 

3  Rom.  2.28f.;  Col.  2.11. 

4  Jer.  4.4. 

5  Jer.  9.26. 
8  Jer.  24.7. 

7  Jer.  11.8;  7.24. 

8  Peake,  ii.  p.  106. 

19 


Covenant  is  made  with  the  nation;  but  he  is  also  an  indi- 
vidualist, in  that  each  Israelite  for  himself  will  know  God. 
His  knowledge  will  be  derived  immediately,  directly,  not  at 
second-hand.  The  covenant  will  for  the  first  time  become 
truly  national,  because  every  individual  component  part  of 
the  nation  will  possess  this  knowledge.  Every  individual 
heart  will  be  renewed,  and  so  will  the  nation  be  really  re- 
newed. 

This  knowledge  will  be  independent  of  teacher  or  neigh- 
bor or  relative.  Each  for  himself  will  know  God.  Here  again 
we  have  teaching  in  harmony  with  the  prophet's  words  on 
other  occasions.  "I  will  give  them  a  heart  to  know  me,  that  I 
am  Jehovah."1  Nor  are  we  left  in  doubt  as  to  what  he  means 
by  "knowing  God."  Before  him,  Hosea  had  shown  wherein 
true  knowledge  of  Jehovah  consists,2 — "not  so  much  the  ac- 
quisition as  the  impression  of  facts,  an  impression  which 
masters  not  only  a  man's  thoughts  but  his  heart  and  will,"3 
"to  feel  the  force  of  the  deity  and  to  act  accordingly,  i.e.,  to 
have  the  feeling  (of  love,  or  duty,  or  whatever  else)  which 
a  knowledge  of  God  implies."*  Jeremiah,  adopting  Hosea's 
definition,  bewails  the  fact  that  the  representatives  of  religion 
know  not  Jehovah,5  that  the  people  know  Him  not.6  While 
it  is  a  fact  of  life  that  wisdom  gives  intellectual  prowess, 
and  might  gives  physical,  and  riches  material  prowess, 
"Thus  saith  Jehovah,  Let  not  the  wise  man  glory  in  his  wis- 
dom, neither  let  the  mighty  man  glory  in  his  might,  let  not 
the  rich  man  glory  in  his  riches;  but  let  him  that  glorieth 
glory  in  this,  that  he  hath  understanding,  and  knoweth  me," 
as  the  One  "who  exerciseth  loving-kindness,  justice,  and 
righteousness,  in  the  earth."7  This  is  the  knowledge  alone 
worth  acquiring;  herein  consists  the  true  glory  of  life,  to 
have  this  insight  into  the  divine  character.  Elsewhere,8  we 
have  as  a  proof  of  Josiah's  truly  knowing  God,  that  "he 
judged  the  cause  of  the  poor  and  needy," — "was  not  this  to 
know  me?  saith  Jehovah."  To  know  God  is  more  than  a  mat- 
ter of  the  intellect;  it  involves  the  affections  and  will,  as 
well;  to  know  about  God  is  theology,  to  know  Him  is  re- 
ligion. Nowhere  in  the  Old  Testament  is  the  truth  more 
clearly  expressed,  that  true  knowledge  of  God  is  not  theo- 
retical, but  such  an  acquaintance  that  the  heart  and  will  are 
involved,  and  right  conduct  ensues.  This  will  characterize 

1  Jer.  24.7. 

2Hos.  4.1;  6.6;  5.4. 

3G.  A.  Smith,  The  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets,  i.  p.  318  ff.:  "Not  to  know 
so  as  to  see  the  fact  of,  but  to  know  so  as  to  feel  the  force  of;"  "parallel  to 
loyalty,  repentance,  love  and  service." 

*  Harper,  Amos  and  Hosea,  p.  cl. 

6  Jer.  2.8. 

«  Jer.  4.22;  9.3,  6. 

7  Jer.  9.24. 
•Jer.  22.16. 

20 


the  era  of  the  New  Covenant — personal  fellowship  with  God, 
that  results  in  doing  the  right.  And  such  an  era  will  be  pos- 
sible, because  the  law  of  God  will  be  written  on  the  heart, 
because  religion  will  be  an  inward  spiritual  affair. 

How  perfectly  in  harmony  with  Jeremiah's  teaching  is 
this  thought  of  first-hand  knowledge  of  God  is  evident, 
further,  from  3.16,  "In  those  days  saith  Jehovah,  they  shall 
say  no  more,  The  ark  of  the  covenant  of  Jehovah;  neither 
shall  it  come  to  mind;  neither  shall  they  remember  it; 
neither  shall  they  miss  it;  neither  shall  it  be  made  any 
more."  The  ark  which  served  as  a  visible  evidence  of  the 
divine  presence,  the  symbol  so  sacred  that  it  alone  was 
worthy  to  stand  in  the  Holy  of  Holies,  would  in  the  era  of  the 
New  Covenant,  not  only  not  be  restored,  it  would  not  even 
be  missed.  For  every  heart  would  be  a  mercy-seat,  over- 
shadowed by  the  divine  presence.  Here,  again,  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  New  Covenant  passage  is  guaranteed  by  its 
not  only  being  in  harmony  with  Jeremiah's  teaching  else- 
where, but  by  its  proving  itself  to  be  the  needed  climax  of 
his  Book. 

A  third  characteristic  of  the  New  Covenant  will  be  for- 
giveness of  sin :  "For  I  will  forgive  their  iniquity,  and  their 
sin  will  I  remember  no  more."  In  the  divine  forgiveness  of 
human  sin  is  found  the  reason  for  this  new  condition.  In- 
wardness and  universal  knowledge  of  God  will  be  possible, 
because  the  sin  that  disturbs  the  relationship  of  the  soul 
with  God  will  be  pardoned.  The  iniquity  that  testifies 
against  man1  will  no  longer  be  a  witness.  Jeremiah  knew 
human  nature  too  well  to  assert  that  there  would  be  no  sin 
in  the  coming  era;  but  he  is  bold  to  state  that  the  back- 
slidings  will  be  healed,  because  the  wanderers  will  return 
to  God.2  The  guilt  which  is  so  deep  in  human  nature  that 
it  cannot  be  removed  with  lye  nor  with  much  soap3  God 
will  remove.  Sin  will  be  forgiven ;  nay,  more,  it  will  be  for- 
gotten, and  a  new  power  will  be  bestowed  upon  life  that 
will  enable  each  one  to  do  the  right  and  perform  his  part  of 
the  covenant,  and  so  assure  its  permanence. 

This,  then,  will  mark  the  New  Covenant — inwardness, 
universal  knowledge  of  God,  forgiveness  of  sin.  And  all  of 
this  shall  avail  for  the  individual.  Not  only  will  it  be  true, 
in  the  glorious  future,  that  "every  man  that  eateth  the  sour 
grapes,  his  teeth" — and  his  alone — "shall  be  set  on  edge  ;"* 
but  it  will  also  be  true  that  the  divine  blessings  will  come 
to  each  individual  soul.  The  covenant  is  national,  but  the 

»Jer.  14.7. 
z  Jer.  3.22. 
8  Jer.  2.22. 
4  Jer.  31.30. 

21 


blessings  are  individual.  "Their  heart"  is  the  Hebrew  idiom1 
for  "their  hearts,"2  in  a  distributive  sense, — that  is,  the  in- 
dividual hearts  of  the  people  composing  the  nation.  This 
again  accords  with  the  prophet's  teachings  elsewhere;  he 
is  the  foremost  individualist  among  the  prophets;5  the  ark 
will  not  be  missed,  the  temple  will  be  destroyed,  the  people 
will  be  scattered  in  a  foreign  land,  but  worship  of  God  will 
still  be  possible,  because  each  individual  will  be  able  to 
maintain  for  himself  a  true  spiritual  life.  Such  a  conception 
made  possible  the  development  of  the  synagogue  worship, — 
made  possible  a  vacant  Holy  of  Holies  which  so  astonished 
Pompey,  as  he  burst  boldly  into  the  all-sacred  place. 

These  characteristics  that  differentiate  the  New  Cove- 
nant from  the  Old  make  possible  a  realization  of  the  terms 
of "  the  Old  Covenant,  which  are  also  the  terms  of  the 
New,  "Ye  shall  be  my  people,  and  I  will  be  your  God."  They 
also  enable  the  New  to  accomplish  that  wherein  the  Old 
failed — to  make  possible  the  keeping  of  the  content  of  the 
Old  Covenant,  which  is  also  the  content  of  the  New — the 
Decalogue,  obedience  to  God's  will,  hearkening  to  His  word, 
walking  in  the  ways  which  He  commands,  development  of 
inner  piety. 

Here  is  the  high-water  mark  of  the  Old  Testament. 
"Jeremiah  was  the  first  to  set  religion  consciously  free  from 
all  extraneous  and  material  elements,  and  to  establish  it 
on  a  purely  spiritual  basis."4  Here  are  three  abiding  qual- 
ities of  all  true  religion — not  rites  and  ceremonies,  but  a 
principle  operating  from  within, — direct  contact  with  God, 
without  mediation  of  priest  or  neighbor, — pardon  which 
restores  God's  trust  in  the  soul,5  and  makes  friendship  possi- 
ble. As  long  as  religion  endures,  so  long  will  it  be  radiant 
with  this  glory. 

It  is  true  that  Jeremiah's  horizon  is  the  nation;  all  of 
this  future  blessedness  is  promised  only  to  Israel  and  Judah ; 
but  it  is  only  a  question  of  time  until  the  larger  universal 
conception  shall  find  expression.  The  hour  will  come  when 
a  Voice  will  be  heard,  "Neither  in  this  mountain,  nor  in 
Jerusalem,  shall  ye  worship  the  Father."  Jeremiah  himself 
foresaw  the  day  when  "unto  thee  shall  the  nations  come 
from  the  ends  of  the  earth."6  With  him,  "the  religion  of 
the  Hebrews  began  to  burst  its  national  bonds  and  to  be- 
come a  universal  world-religion."7 

1  Gesenius-Kautzsch,  Hebrew  Grammar,  2d  Eng.   Ed.,   Sec.    124,   s. 

2  Driver  translates  "hearts,"   (Jeremiah,  p.   191). 

3  Kautzsch,  in  Hastings,  D.B.,  Extra  Vol.,  p.  697. 

4  Cornill,  The  Prophets  of  Israel,  p.  96. 

8  G.  A.  Smith,  The  Forgiveness  of  Sins,  p.  18  ff. 

•  Jer.  16.19,  a  passage  isolated  in  the  prophet's  theology,  but  acknowledged  by 
Cornill  and  others  to  be  his. 

7  Kent,  Sermons,  Epistles,  etc.,  p.  285. 

22 


Not  until  Christ  came  did  Jeremiah's  words  find  their 
realization.  Then,  in  so  remarkable  a  manner  did  Jesus  ful- 
fil the  prophet's  ideal,  that  Jeremiah  has  been  styled  "em- 
phatically the  one  Christian  before  Christ."1 

When  Christ  instituted  the  sacrament  of  bread  and  wine, 
the  central  words  in  that  ordinance,  "This  cup  is  the  new 
covenant  in  my  blood,"2  carry  us  back  to  Jeremiah's  pro- 
phetic vision.  Jesus  at  once  fulfilled  and  immortalized  the 
New  Covenant  of  Israel's  prophet. 

"This  cup,"  according  to  the  idiom  of  the  language  of 
Jesus,  signifies  the  wine  contained  in  the  cup ;  and  the  wine 
contained  in  the  cup  symbolizes  the  blood  shed  on  Calvary. 
"Is"  means  not  being  identical  with  the  New  Covenant, 
but  representing  it, — more  even  than  representing :  "this  cup 
is"  "a  silent  announcement"3  of  the  covenant  soon  to  be 
ratified  in  His  blood, — nay,  more,  it  is  the  means  of  spiritual 
communion  with  the  glorified  Christ,  in  such  a  way,  that 
the  blessings  of  the  New  Covenant  are  appropriated.  "New"* 
means  not  having  yet  been,  taking  the  place  of  something 
which  has  previously  existed,  rather  than  new  in  reference 
to  time,5  recent;6  and  involves  a  qualitative  contrast.  "In 
my  blood"  signifies  sealed  in  my  blood,  in  virtue  of  my 
blood,  "the  Lord's  death"  being  the  ratification  of  the  New 
Covenant. 

The  analogy  between  the  Old  Covenant  and  the  New  is 
close.  That  at  Sinai  had  been  ratified  by  the  blood  of  ani- 
mals: "Moses  took  half  of  the  blood,  and  put  it  in  basins; 
and  half  of  the  blood  he  sprinkled  on  the  altar.  And  he 
took  the  book  of  the  covenant,  and  read  in  the  audience  of 
the  people:  and  they  said,  All  that  Jehovah  hath  spoken 
will  we  do,  and  be  obedient.  And  Moses  took  the  blood,  and 
sprinkled  it  on  the  people,  and  said,  Behold,  the  blood  of 
the  covenant  which  Jehovah  hath  made  with  you  concern- 
ing all  these  words."7  As  has  been  observed,  a  significant 
feature  of  "cutting  a  covenant"  was  always  the  sacrificial 
element — passing  between  the  parts  of  the  animal  sacri- 
ficed,8 or  partaking  of  a  sacrificial  meal,9  or  using  blood  in 

1  Adeney,  p.  216. 

2  1  Cor.  11.25;  Luke  22.20.  The  form  of  expression  would  seem  to  indicate  that 
by   the  time   these   words  were   penned,   they  had  become   a   part  of  the   Christian 
liturgy.  On  the  comparison  of  these  passages  with  Mark  14.24  and  Matt.  26.28,  see 
Hastings,  Dictionary  of  Christ  and  the  Gospels,  ii.  p.  74. 

3  Beet,  St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  p.    195. 

*  KCUl>6$. 

e  vtos. 

8  Thayer,  Greek-English  Lexicon  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  318;  Cremer,  Bibli- 
co-Theological  Lexicon  of  New  Testament  Greek,  p.  321  f. ;  Trench,  New  Testament 
Synonyms,  p.  206  ff. 

7  Ex.  24.6  ff. 

8  Gen.  15.17;  Jer.  34.18  f. 
•Gen.  31.54. 

23 


various  symbolical  ways.1  In  the  ratification  of  the  Old 
Covenant  at  Sinai,  half  of  the  blood  was  sprinkled  on  the 
altar,  and  half  on  the  people,  perhaps  to  signify  the  mysti- 
cal union  of  Jehovah  and  the  people.2  Our  Lord  Himself 
is  the  sacrifice  accompanying  the  making  of  the  new  cove- 
nant.3 It  is  ratified  in  His  blood. 

Through  this  "blood  of  the  covenant,"4  the  blessings  of 
the  new  covenant,  which  is  "not  of  the  letter,  but  of  the 
spirit,"5  are  realized.  The  sacrifice  on  Calvary  makes  possi- 
ble inwardness  of  religion,  universal  knowledge  of  God,  and 
forgiveness  of  sin,  which  in  turn  make  it  possible  for  God 
really  to  be  our  God,  and  for  us  truly  to  be  His  people, 
obedient  to  His  will.  Through  Christ's  blood,  the  law  of 
God  is  written  inwardly  on  the  heart;  through  His  blood, 
we  come  into  immediate  knowledge  of  God;  through  His 
blood,  sin  is  pardoned.  This  third  blessing  of  the  New 
Covenant  is  especially  referred  to  in  Matt.  26.28,  "This  is 
my  blood  of  the  covenant,  which  is  poured  out  for  many, 
unto  remission  of  sins."  The  blood  shed  on  the  Cross  gives 
the  assurance  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  covenant-promise,  "I 
will  forgive  their  iniquity,  and  their  sin  will  I  remember  no 
more."6 

In  partaking  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  in 
a  mystical  way  we  become  partakers  of  Christ's  body  and 
blood,  receiving  the  blessings  of  the  New  Covenant,  pri- 
marily that  of  forgiveness  of  sin.  For,  sin  disturbs  the  com- 
munion of  the  spirit  with  God;  and  until  sin  is  pardoned, 
there  can  not  be  that  unrestricted  contact  with  God,  that  per- 
fect fellowship,  which  is  the  most  fundamental  thing  in  all 
religion.  Consciousness  of  wrongness  impedes  fellowship 
with  God,  so  that  sin  must  be  dealt  with  first,  before  true 
knowledge  of  God,  which  the  New  Covenant  aims  to  give, 
can  become  our  possession.  Forgiveness  of  sin,  made  possi- 
ble by  Calvary,  prepares  the  way  for  this  fellowship,  this 
true  knowledge  of  God,  which  is  life  eternal. 

From  the  New  Covenant  words  of  Jeremiah  have 
come,  indirectly,  our  names,  "Old  Testament"  and  "New 
Testament,"  as  applied  to  the  two  great  divisions  of 
Scripture.  This  fact  gives  the  passage  an  added  historical 
interest. 

In  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  themselves,  we  find7  as  names 

1  See  Trumbull,  The  Blood  Covenant.    Lect.  1. 

2  The  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  iv.  p.  319;  Driver,  Exodus,  p.  253. 

3  Heb.  9.11-22. 

*Mark  14.24;  Matt.  26.28;  Ex.  24.8;  Heb.  9.20. 

8  2  Cor.  3.6. 

6Cf.  Rom.  11.27;  Heb.  8.12. 

7  See  Ryle,  The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  302. 

24 


for  the  Pentateuch,  "the  book  of  the  law  of  Moses/'1  and 
"the  law  of  Moses;"2  and  as  a  name  for  the  Prophets,  or 
perhaps  for  both  Law  and  Prophets,  "the  books."3 

In  the  Old  Testament  Apocrypha,  we  find  as  names  for 
the  Law,  "the  book  of  the  covenant  of  the  Most  High  God,"4 
"the  books  of  the  law,"5  and  "book  of  the  covenant;"0  and 
for  the  Scriptures  as  a  whole,  "the  law  and  the  prophets 
and  the  other  books."7 

In  the  New  Testament,  omitting  various  names,  we  find 
the  designation,  "the  Old  Covenant,"8  referring  evidently  to 
the  covenant  contained  in  the  Law. 

Gradually,  "Old  Covenant"  came  to  be  applied  by  Chris- 
tians9 not  only  to  the  first  five,  but  to  all  the  books  of  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures.  The  first  recorded  use  of  the  name  in 
this  way  is  by  Melito  of  Sardis,  who  wrote  about  A.  D.  170: 
"Accordingly,  when  I  went  East,  and  came  to  the  place 
where  these  things  were  preached  and  done,  I  learned  ac- 
curately the  books  of  the  Old  Covenant,10  and  send  them 
to  thee  as  written  below."11  Clement  of  Alexandria,  prior 
to  A.  D.  216,  also  quotes12  from  the  "Old  Covenant."13 
Julius  Africanus,  writing  to  Origen,14  about  A.  D.  221,  re- 
marks, "All  the  books  of  the  Old  Covenant10  have  been 
translated  from  Hebrew  into  Greek."  And  Origen,  replying 
to  Africanus,15  uses  the  same  expression,  "Books  of  the  Old 
Covenant."10  Eusebius,  A.  D.  325,  refers16  to  "a  catalogue 
of  the  acknowledged  books  of  the  Old  Covenant,"10  and17 
"a  catalogue  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Covenant."10 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  A.  D.  348,  enjoins,18  "Learn which 

are  the  books  of  the  Old  Covenant;"10  "Read  the  Divine 
Scriptures,  the  twenty-two  books  of  the  Old  Covenant."10 
Athanasius,  A.  D.  367,  says,19  "There  are,  then  of  the  Old 
Covenant,10  twenty-two  books  in  number."  Gregory  of  Nazi- 
anzus,  (died  A.  D.  389),  uses20  the  same  words10  in  refer- 

1Neh.  8.1. 

1  Mai.  4.4. 

•Dan.  9.2,— in  LXX.,  tv  rats  /8i//3\ois,  (whence  our  "Bible"),— as  applied  to 
the  entire  Old  Testament,  first  found  in  the  so-called  Second  Epistle  of  Clement, 
(14.2),  written  A.D.  120-140. 

*  Ecclus.  24.23. 
s  1  Mace.  1.56. 

•  1  Mace    1  57. 

T  Ecclus.,  Prologue. 
8  2  Cor.  3.14. 

'  Because  involving  a  Christian  point  of  view,  this  name  was  rarely  used  by 
later  Jews.  (The  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  iii.  p.  141.) 

10  rijs  IlaXcuas  Aia0i}fn?s. 

11  Eusebius,  Hist.  Bed.  iv.  26.14. 

12  Stromatum,  iii.  6. 

13  tv  rrj  IlaXcup  Aiafl^KT/. 

14  Letter  to  Origen  about  the  History  of  Susanna. 

15  Letter  from  Origen  to  Africanus. 
"Hist.  Bed.  iv.  26.12. 

»H.  E.  vi.  25.1. 

18  Catechesis  iv.   33. 

19  Festal  Letter  xxxix. 

20  Carmina,  ii.  2. 

25 


ring  to  the  Old  Covenant.  Didymus  of  Alexandria1  (died 
394),  and  Isidore  of  Pelusium2  (died  449),  both  refer  to 
"the  Elder  Covenant."3 

"New  Covenant,"  as  applied  to  the  Christian  Scriptures, 
is  first  found  in  the  argument  of  the  unknown  writer  against 
the  Montanists,  who  wrote  probably  about  A.  D.  193,  and 
who  is  quoted  by  Eusebius:4  "That  I  might  seem  to  some 
to  be  making 'additions  to  the  doctrines  or  precepts  of  the 
Gospel  of  the  New  Covenant,5  which  it  is  impossible  for 
one  who  has  chosen  to  live  according  to  the  Gospel  either 
to  increase  or  to  diminish."  Clement  of  Alexandria  men- 
tions6 "the  voice  of  the  Lord  according  to  the  New  Cove- 
nant."7 Origen,  prior  to  A.  D.  228,  refers8  to  "testimonies 
from  what  are  believed  by  us  to  be  divine  writings,  namely, 
from  that  which  is  called  the  Old  Covenant,  and  that  which 
is  styled  the  New."9  The  statement  is  interesting  as  show- 
ing that,  at  the  beginning  of  the  third  century,  the  two  parts 
of  Scripture  were  perhaps  commonly,  but  not  yet  exclu- 
sively, designated  by  these  names.  In  the  first  part  of  the 
following  century,  Eusebius  makes  reference10  to  "the  laws 
of  the  New  Covenant."5  Athanasius,  in  the  same  letter  in 
which  he  mentions  the  Old  Covenant,11  remarks,  "Again,  it 
is  not  tedious  to  speak  of  the  (books)  of  the  New"12  (Cove- 
nant) . 

"Testament,"  as  a  name  for  each  division  of  Scripture, 
was  first  applied  by  Tertullian.  The  Itala  Version  had  al- 
ready translated  diatheke13  in  both  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments by  "testamentum,"  and  the  Vulgate  in  the  Gallican 
Psalter  and  in  the  New  Testament  had  continued  the  usage. 
Tertullian  was  not  responsible  for  this  mistranslation,  but 
he  did  help  to  fix  the  word  in  the  vocabulary  of  daily  life, 

1  De  Trinitate  i. 

2  Epistolarum  i. 
*  i]  npfffpvrtpa 
*H.  E.  v.  16.3 
§  rfjs  Rearms 

8  Stromatum  iii.  11;  also,  v.  1. 

7  TT]v  IStav  AiadriKrjv. 

8  Peri  Archon,  iv.  1.1. 

'  TTJS  re  \eyo/J.^vr}s  IlaXcuas  Atafl^KTjs  /ecu  TTJS  Ka\ovfJL^vr]S  Keui'Tjs. 

10  Demonstrations  Evangelicae  i. 

11  Festal  Letter  xxxix. 
1:  TTJS  KCUPIJS. 

18  The  LXX.  translators,  rightly  thinking  of  the  divine  covenant  as  one-sided, 
instead  of  translating  the  Hebrew  "B«rith"  by  "suntheke,"  a  compact  in  which  two 
parties  act  on  an  equality,  preferred  "diatheke,"  a  disposition  or  arrangement  im- 
posed by  one  party  upon  another.  But,  inasmuch  as  "diatheke"  was  also  used  for 
what  we  know  as  "last  will  and  testament,"  confusion  has  been  introduced  into 
the  Biblical  idea  of  the  covenant.  This  confusion  may  be  partly  avoided  by  recalling 
that  the  "Testaments,  from  which  our  Wills  are  directly  descended,  at  first  took 
effect  immediately  on  their  execution;  they  were  not  secret;  they  were  not  re- 
vocable." "The  Mancipatory  Testament,  as  it  may  be  called,  differed  in  its  prim- 
itive form  from  a  modern  will.  As  it  amounted  to  a  conveyance  out-and-out  of  t 
Testator's  estate,  it  was  not  revocable.  There  could  be  no  new  exercise  of  a  power 
which  had  been  exhausted.  Again,  it  was  not  secret.  The  heir  knew  exactly  what  his 

26 


as  he  determined  so  many  theological  terms.  He  refers,1 
about  208  A.  D.,  to  "each  'Instrumentum'  or  'Testamen- 
tum,' as  it  is  more  usual  to  call  it."  He  wavered  between 
the  use  of  Instrument  and  Testament,  but  through  his  writ- 
ings the  "more  usual"  term,  "Testamentum,"2  passed  into 
ecclesiastical  Latin,  and  was  gradually  adopted. 

Lactantius,  prior  to  311  A.  D.,  not  only  adopts  the 
terminology  of  Tertullian,  but  thinks  of  "Testamentum" 
as  a  "last  will  and  testament" :  "All  Scripture  is  divided  into 
two  Testaments.  That  which  preceded  the  advent  and  pas- 
sion of  Christ — that  is,  the  law  and  the  prophets — is  called 
the  Old ;  but  those  things  which  were  written  after  His  res- 
urrection are  named  the  New  Testament.3  The  Jews  make 
use  of  the  Old,  we  of  the  New;  but  yet  they  are  not  dis- 
cordant, for  the  New  is  the  unfolding  of  the  Old,  and  in 
both  there  is  the  same  testator,  even  Christ,  who  having 
suffered  death  for  us,  made  us  heirs  of  His  everlasting  king- 
dom."4 He  even  misreads,  in  the  same  connection,  Jer.  31.31 
as  referring  to  a  "New  Testament." 

This  association  of  the  name,  New  Testament,  with  the 
death  of  Christ,  and  with  His  making  believers  heirs,  mak- 
ing "testament"  equivalent  to  a  last  will  and  testament, 
was  doubtless  partly  responsible  for  the  continued  use  of 
the  term  in  the  centuries  that  followed.  Through  the  Latin, 
the  titles  "Old"  and  "New  Testament"  entered  into  our 
own  and  other  languages.  The  title-page  of  the  American 
Revised  Version,  "The  New  Covenant,  commonly  called 
the  New  Testament  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ," 
recognizes  the  incorrectness  of  our  customary  designation; 
but  centuries  of  usage  have  so  entrenched  "Testament," 
that  to  attempt  a  change  seems  to  savor  almost  of  pedantry. 
And,  yet,  "Old  Covenant"  and  "New  Covenant"  alone  are 
true  to  Scriptural  thought,  and  these  names  we  owe  ulti- 
mately to  the  prophet  of  Anathoth. 

So  long  did  superficiality  associate  Jeremiah  with  lamen- 
tation, that  a  "jeremiad"  came  to  be  a  synonym  for  a  tale 

rights  were,  and  was  aware  that  he  was  irreversibly  entitled  to  the  inheritance 

But  perhaps  the  most  surprising  consequence  of  this  relation  of  Testaments  to 
Conveyances  was  the  immediate  vesting  of  the  inheritance  in  the  Heir."  (Maine, 
Ancient  Law,  3d  American  Ed.,  pp.  169,  199.)  Such  was  the  original  will  among 
the  Romans.  "But  Greek  law  retained  that  character  much  longer"  than  Roman. 
"The  Galatian  Will  is  irrevocable  and  unalterable;  it  comes  into  operation  as  soon 
as  the  conditions  are  performed  by  the  heir;  it  is  public  and  open."  (Ramsay,  The 
Expositor,  Nov.  1898,  p.  337  f.)  This  idea  is  latent  in  the  parable  of  the  Prodigal 
Son,  where  the  son  in  his  father's  life-time  asks  for  his  share  of  his  father's 
estate.  The  Greek  will  did  not  differ  therefore  materially  from  the  Hebrew  idea  of 
the  divine  covenant.  But,  when  "diatheke"  in  the  New  Testament  was  translated 
"testament,"  endless  confusion  resulted. 

1  Adversus  Marcionem,  iv.  1. 

2  De  Novo  Testamento,   (Adv.  Praxeam  15.) 

3  Novum  Testamentum. 

4  Divinae  Institutiones  iv.  20. 

27 


of  grief.  But,  the  prophet  who  foresaw  the  dawn  of  a  New 
Covenant  was  far  more  than  a  prophet  of  despair.  A  man 
highly  sensitive,  deeply  suffering,  feeling  the  tremendous 
compulsion  of  a  divine  commission,  communing  with  his 
God  with  a  fulness  and  freedom  almost  unparalleled,  seem- 
ing at  times  even  to  challenge  the  One  Who  had  predestined 
him  before  birth  to  his  awful  life-task, — Jeremiah  is  per- 
haps the  most  human  of  all  the  prophets.  A  man  of  reverie, 
as  Michelangelo  and  Sargent  have  pictured  him,  he  also 
passed  through  a  deep  inner  experience,  out  of  which  sprang 
this  thought  of  a  New  Covenant,  "the  profoundest  sentiment 
of  the  Old  Testament."1  Through  one  who  himself  had  ex- 
perienced religion  as  an  inward  force,  who  himself  knew 
God  by  a  vital  communion,  who  himself  had  received  for- 
giveness for  sin, — through  such  a  one  God  spoke  this  mes- 
sage of  a  New  Covenant, — a  message  that  reveals  the  un- 
derlying unity  of  Hebrew  and  Christian  Scriptures, — that 
links  Calvary  with  Sinai, — that  illustrates  both  how  Juda- 
ism needs  Christianity  as  its  fulfilment,  and  how  Christian- 
ity is  rooted  deep  in  Judaism, — a  message  that  shows  how 
the  advance  of  the  New  Testament  over  the  Old  lies  "in 
the  liberation  of  the  highest  Old  Testament  ideas  from 
their  limitations  and  lower  accompaniments,  in  their  his- 
toric exhibition  and  enrichment  through  the  life,  death  and 
resurrection  of  Christ,  and  in  their  combination  with  the 
fresh  and  powerful  dynamic  created  by  personal  devotion 
to  Him."2 

To  me,  now,  in  this  Seminary,  has  been  entrusted  the 
task  of  interpreting  this  Old  Covenant  and  its  relation  to  the 
New.  The  work  of  my  Department  is  partly  linguistic,  to 
furnish  a  working  acquaintance  with  Hebrew  and  the 
cognate  Semitic  languages,  in  order  that  the  student  may 
have  first-hand  knowledge  of  Scripture  text.  But  this  is 
only  a  means  to  an  end.  My  aim  is  also  to  train  in  correct 
methods  of  interpretation;  and  above  all  to  interpret  the 
abiding  spiritual  message  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  to  in- 
dicate the  relationship  between  the  message  spoken  by  God 
"of  old  time  unto  the  fathers  in  the  prophets  by  divers  por- 
tions and  in  divers  manners,"  and  the  message  "at  the  end 
of  these  days  spoken  unto  us  in  his  Son."  To  relate  a  knowl- 
edge of  the  Old  Covenant  to  the  practical  requirements  of 
the  pastorate, — to  enable  the  student  to  use  the  older  Scrip- 
tures in  teaching  and  in  preaching  Christ, — this  is  one 
dominant  aim  with  which  I  enter  upon  my  task.  Congre- 

1  McCurdy  in  The  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  iv.  p.  322. 

3H.  W.  Robinson,  Religious  Ideas  of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  225. 

28 


gations  of  worshippers  care  very  little  for  critical  data; 
they  care  very  much  for  spiritual  truths.  Important  as  is 
the  place  of  critical  study,  its  value  is  subordinate  to  that 
of  the  message  which  for  all  time  will  be  able  to  make  wise 
unto  salvation  through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus ;  which 
will  ever  be  profitable  for  teaching,  for  reproof,  for  correc- 
tion, for  instruction  which  is  in  righteousness,  making  the 
man  of  God  complete,  furnished  completely  unto  every  good 
work. 


29 


YC   15729 


U.C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


